March 12, 2013

It has been a few weeks since our last update. We have extended the time to respond for the participants. While some thought the extension was unfair to those that have submitted on or before the due date, Pallab, the professors, and I all want as many data points as possible in the evaluation. That said, we are taking note of those teams that submitted early.

Again, we should remind all participants that time is one of the factors in the subsequent evaluation by Oracle. Therefore, a quicker turnaround is preferable and no participant should withhold submitting results unless the additional time is required to complete the review. While there is no penalty for submitting after the first deadline, Oracle will look favorably upon those that finish quickly.

Also, if there were tasks required by the protocol that your firm would not have normally undertaken in a real-life review (categorizing privilege for NR docs), please identify that task as a break-out on your model invoices with an explanation. You may submit your model invoices at you leisure, but no later than May 1.

March 04, 2013

Selection of advanced TAR or CAR-based type search and review software is not an easy decision.

I had a chance recently to study the private manuscript of Professor Doug Oard on search design, Information Retrieval for E-Discovery. He is one of, if not the top independent expert on search in the world today. His manuscript written with William Webber is a survey that will be used to teach the next generation of information retrieval engineers, the ones who will help design the legal search software of the future.

Doug was also kind enough to try to explain key portions of this manuscript to me. The end result is a rather complex and lengthy blog entitled The Many Types of Legal Search Software in the CAR Market Today. Here is my takeaway list of twenty-five plus factors you should consider to evaluate the strength of search software. They should help you to evaluate the overall quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the software on the market today.

Search of content.

Search of contextual metadata.

Search of descriptive metadata.

Search of behavioral metadata.

Classifier design.

Active query formulation features (building blocks).

Annotated example training features (pearl growing).

Random training abilities.

Human judgment training features.

Software uncertainty selected training.

Balance in your classifier system between complexity and intuitiveness.

There are many other criteria, I know, such as information security, more specific user interface issues, reviewer and production issues, reviewer monitoring and interface, online access, etc. Software selection should also carefully consider the software support and training issues. Project management support is also critical, some say just as important as the software itself, especially for novice users of the search software.

February 01, 2013

The second annual Arizona State University-Arkfeld eDiscovery and Digital Evidence Conference takes place on March 13-15 at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at ASU in Tempe, Ariz. (near Phoenix). Attendees can receive up to 15 CLE credits. The first 80 registrants receive an e-discovery Best Practices Guide as part of the conference fee.

It is an exciting time for us as we continue preparing for the conference with prominent speakers and content. Joining us
will be federal Magistrate Judge John Facciola, (left) of the District of Columbia, who is providing the keynote address and
assistance on several panels. Maura Grossman will discuss
"technology-assisted review," and we'll have a host of other experts discussing
e-discovery and digital evidence trends and issues.

There's no better time to visit the beautiful Grand Canyon State than in the spring, when you can catch a spring training baseball game, play golf and tennis at world-class venues, or simply bask in the sun around the pool. All that in addition to brushing up on the critical field of electronic information.

January 24, 2013

The University of Florida Levin College of Law and EDRM are offering a new e-discovery conference, "Electronic Discovery for the Small and Medium Case," to be held on April 4-5, 2013. The conference will take place at the UF Law campus in Gainesville, Fla., and will also be available as a live, online stream. For more information, go to http://www.law.ufl.edu/academics/ediscovery-conference.

January 18, 2013

There's a debate flaring up on the Law Technology News homepage today — should your law firm insource its e-discovery, so you can control everything, or outsource it, so the administration is someone else's hassle?

"While the creation of a team of highly trained staff and the investment
in technology may not be for some firms, the evidence clearly shows that
many firms are not only continuing to in-source, but are ramping up
their investments in technology and people," they concluded.

January 15, 2013

Just a quick update to answer questions about Friday's training session. EDI will release the audio recording some time later this evening. Please remember, that the recording is subject to commitments outlined in the NDA, Agreement, and Confidentiality Agreement with Oracle and its outside counsel.

January 14, 2013

As many of you know, EDI has been working on its second computer-assisted review (CAR) study, comparing the results of an actual document review in a real litigation to CAR providers.

After almost two years of planning, last week the EDI Oracle Study team released the entire dataset of over 1.6 million docs to the first wave of participants. Top performers stand to gain Oracle’s e-discovery business. A link to the press release about the data is attached to this post.

On Friday, January 11, 2013, the team had its first training call with outside counsel. Over 60 representatives from the participants dialed in. The goal of the training was to familiarize participants with the legal issues surrounding the matter. The original complaint was filed under seal — but we are working on what we can discuss in public.

Prior to and during the call participants submitted dozens of questions about the matter — mostly focused on the data load and technical issues. The EDI and Oracle team are working diligently on what we thought the technical team would be able to answer by today, but it is looking like we will respond to technical questions on Wednesday 1/16/2013.

I will post weekly with updates on the status of the study here on EDD Update. I will Tweet from @patrickoot and post on LinkedIn when I make the updates.

January 07, 2013

The hangover from Rambus "shredding party" in the the late 1990s continues for the manufacturer and patentee of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) chips in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.

As reported by Jan Wolfe in Law Technology News' sibling publication The Am Law Litigation Daily, Judge Sue Robinson "tossed a patent
case Rambus brought against Micron Technologies Inc. more than a decade ago, concluding that the company deliberately destroyed evidence ahead of its
litigation campaign." Mark this as a flashback for Rambus: as Wolfe notes, Robinson four years earlier made the same ruling, reversed by the Federal Circuit in 2011 finding further explanation was warranted due to the severity of the sanction.

Rambus sued Micron for patent infringement of its technology to speed computer memory as a counterclaim to a suit filed by Micron August 28, 2000, seeking
decalaratory judgment for non-infringement on the grounds that Rambus' patents were unenforceable and invalid. According to the opinion, Micron's suit was
filed in reaction to an email from Rambus CEO Geoff Tate to Micron chief Steve Appleton threatening litigation.

December 07, 2012

Are in-house and outside counsel in corporate cases getting better at e-discovery?

In a recent article in Corporate Counsel, Sue Reisinger finds good news for corporate attorneys in Kroll Ontrack's yearly analysis of e-discovery opinions, particularly in its numbers on sanctions: they’re down this year, from last. Kroll's numbers are drawn from a selection of 70 state and federal e-discovery cases between January and December 2012, which are summarized, categorized and added to a database of e-discovery case law on Kroll's website.

The numbers on sanctions do look promising, with 32 percent of cases analyzed addressing sanctions for preservation and spoliation issues, noncompliance with court orders, and disputes over production — a 10 percent drop from last year's survey.

December 05, 2012

On the site, Lynch posted an open letter to the HP board of directors. Lynch sent that letter on Nov. 27, but now, "I am placing this letter in the public domain in the interests of complete transparency."

"It was shocking that HP put non-specific
but highly damaging allegations into the public domain without prior
notification or contact with me, as former CEO of Autonomy. I utterly reject all allegations of impropriety," Lynch stated. He then posed several questions about how HP has operated Autonomy since the 2011 acquisition.

November 29, 2012

Relativity shop DTI, known to be acquisitive in the past few years, is expanding its reach. Yesterday the company finalized a deal to acquire former e-discovery high-flyer Fios Inc., officials said. Check out our full story over at Law Technology News.

Take note, California federal court practitioners: The Northern District of California really wants you to play nice when it comes to e-discovery. The district on Tuesday unveiled new guidelines effective November 27 for handling electronic discovery, joining a growing list of jurisdictions taking measures to tackle the discovery of electronically stored information.

November 27, 2012

Michael Arkfeld and Arizona State University's Center for Law, Science & Innovation is very pleased to announce that the Second Annual ASU-Arkfeld eDiscovery and Digital Evidence Conference will be held on March 13-15, 2013, in Tempe, Ariz., at ASU's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law.

Our keynote speakers this year will be the Honorable Paul Grimm, Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge from the District of Maryland, and, returning from last year by popular request, the Honorable John Facciola, U.S. Magistrate Judge from the District of Columbia.

November 20, 2012

In news that eclipses a $6.9 billion loss in Hewlett-Packard Corp.'s fourth quarter, big e-discovery player and HP acquisition Autonomy has found itself embroiled in a financial scandal that has customers and industry experts pondering what the fallout will be.

As Evan Koblentz reports: "Hewlett-Packard Co. said Tuesday it will take an $8.8 billion write down related to its purchase of Autonomy PLC and alleged that Autonomy executives committed accounting fraud to inflate the company's value during the sale."

HP said in a statement: "the majority of this impairment charge, more than $5 billion, is linked to serious accounting improprieties, misrepresentation and disclosure failures discovered by an internal investigation by HP and forensic review into Autonomy's accounting practices." Autonomy was acquired by HP for $10.3 billion in 2011.

Dechert CIO Michael Shannon said the news caught him wondering about what direction Autonomy and more specifically iManage "was going to go."

For more details about the scandal and reaction from the legal technology community, read the article on LTN online.

If you answered serious data breaches involving the personal and financial information of over 100 million users, 24 million customers, and 3.6 million unencrypted Social Security numbers respectively, you get the gold star.

But now that data breaches are rampant — with a Ponemon Institute survey reporting 50 organizations experiencing 72 cyberattacks per week — not to mention the compliance issues these attacks raise with federal laws such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley, what are corporate entities expected to do about it?

Selby suggests some of the issues raised by cyberattacks can be met by the aptly named "cyberinsurance." While some may see hype and scareware in this growing line of coverage, Selby lists some of the benefits of cyberinsurance policies, which can range from covering violations of privacy laws that includes paying fines to "cyber-extortion," or meeting the expenses of a threat to disrupt a company's (or law firm's or government agency's) computer systems. Coverage is also available for threats to or attacks on a policyholder's reputation.

Another area covered under the cyberinsurance umbrella is cloud computing, since, as Selby writes, "Cloud customers may not be able to contractually transfer the risk of data breaches to the provider." Some might argue that if a cloud provider doesn't have its own policy in place for cyberattacks, don't sign the contract and seek out a safer cloud. Others might counter you should find coverage where you can.

November 09, 2012

U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter of the Southern District of New York upheld Magistrate Judge Peck's decision not to recuse himself from the Da Silva
Moore, et al. v. Publicis Groupe SA and MSLGroup litigation, Evan Koblentz
reports. Plaintiffs had asserted Peck had conflicting
interests in the use of predictive coding software due to public
statements and appearances favoring the review method.

November 07, 2012

We interrupt your construction of a standard query designed to retrieve relevant documents, with high recall and precision, from a corpus of documents based on your expertise as an attorney and content expert in a case and your iterative work at refining a search query with reflexive search terms after your review of search results based on previous, iterative searching. Attention.

H5, a provider of e-discovery, technology-assisted review and case preparation support, has patented a process for "high recall and high precision relevancy searching." The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted to H5 on October 23 U.S. Patent No. 8,296,309, which covers aspects of H5's "deterministic" technology-assisted review, according to the company — and the USPTO. We checked.

November 06, 2012

After floating rumors since January at LegalTech New York, kCura Corp.'s Relativity is getting a processing engine in its latest release set for Nov. 30, Evan Koblentz reports. The new addition is targeted at law firms whose e-discovery processing needs are around the one-gigabyte range.

"We brought this point-and-shoot simplicity into processing. It's fully integrated into Relativity," said company CEO Andrew Sieja. The software will sell separately from Relativity review.

The new version of Relativity, 7.5, will also boast a simpler interface with expanded help files and reordered menus, as well as upgrades to its predictive coding tool, Relativity Assisted Review, including automated reports and set creation, email notifications, a management console and a faster setup.

November 01, 2012

Computers against humans — is this the debate being waged around predictive coding to determine the future of document review? if this is the debate, is it what legal practitioners should really be focusing on in e-discovery?

October 29, 2012

There is a new predictive coding case in Delaware Court of Chancery that could have a big impact on the attitude of corporate America to technology-assisted review. EORHB, Inc., et al v. HOA Holdings, LLC, C.A. No. 7409-VCL (Del. Ch. Oct. 15, 2012). This case involves a complex multimillion-dollar commercial indemnity dispute involving the sale of Hooters, a well-known restaurant, famous for its chicken wings, beer, and other things.

The judge hearing the dispute, Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster, is also well-known, but for something completely different, namely surprise rulings. This case adds to that reputation. He completely surprised the lawyers in this case with a surprise bench ruling that they all use predictive coding and share a common vendor. Here are his exact words:

October is proving to be a busy month for predictive coding in the e-discovery industry. On the heels of Daegis and Exterro announcing PC offerings, two more e-discovery vendors have entered the fray.

International business and legal advisory firm FTI Consulting, Inc., announced the launch of a new Predictive Discovery service by its technology practice group, reports Sean Doherty. The new service promises to reduce review time and cost as well as unite people and processes with predictive coding software — familiar language to anyone watching technology-assisted review products. Doherty spoke with Joe Looby, senior managing director in FTI's technology practice, to see what sets FTI's Predictive Discovery apart from other offerings.

The new version of The Sedona Cooperation Proclamation: Resources for the Judiciary has as senior editors Ron Hedges, retired magistrate judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, and attorney Ken Withers, Sedona's director of judicial education.
Among other additions, the latest version details 20 "stages of
litigation from a judge's perspective," from preservation to
post-judgment costs.

The nonprofit law and policy think tank will also be offering a password-protected collaboration area exclusively for judges on its website.

October 17, 2012

Two more e-discovery vendors hopped on the predictive coding bandwagon this week, which may have some speculating at what point the technology will be omnipresent in the industry.

Roseville, Calif.-based Daegis Inc., a company that hosts its software for law firms and corporate legal, announced Acumen, its machine learning technology that will be available as a standard feature for subscribing clients and also for customers on a per-gigabyte model, reports Evan Koblentz. Acumen takes what Doug Stewart, vice president of technology at Daegis, describes as a "process-driven" approach.

October 12, 2012

From time to time, LTN columnist, trial attorney, and E-Discovery Special Master Craig Ball likes to rail at his fellow travelers who have passed the Bar that their legal education is far from over.

In this month's "Ball in Your Court column," Ball traces what he sees as the necessary evolution from barrister as bare, forked creature who trafficked in paper and banker's boxes, Homo Erectus, to legal starchild of the digital age, "Homo Electronicus" (cue tympanies) — who not only totes a tablet but knows exactly where the data entered into it resides (and what to do with it). Once again, it's time for attorneys to get schooled in technology.

October 02, 2012

Incident to the cover story for the October 1 issue of Law Technology News, "Defending Big Data," we sent a request for information to vendors who attended LegalTech New York 2012 and asked them if their products or services addressed the tension that exists in mining, exploiting, and monetizing customer data versus the security and privacy of that data.

I summarized some of the responses in the story "Big Data Technology." For the most part, the responses showed that legal technology was focused on Big Data to extract evidence used in litigation and government investigation and not to address the privacy and security interests in the large data sets owned by enterprises. The software manufacturers that predominantly handle enterprise Big Data, e.g., IBM, Oracle, and SAP, do not apply the same wares to e-discovery and litigation support -- yet.

September 26, 2012

ARMA International's 57th Annual Conference and Expo was held from September 23
to 25 at McCormick Place in Chicago with LTN Technology Editor Sean
Doherty on hand to gather information.

One session titled "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Information Governance
Leaders," drew upon the experience of a panel of information professionals — all certified records managers at IBM — to discuss best practices for ILG. Panelists worked together to define a strategy to meet the risks posed by stored information and mitigate the burdens that lawsuits bring to organizations.

In another session, "Content Assessment: Kick-Starting Your IG Program With
Content Analytics," Kristi Perdue, ERMS (AIIM Electronic Records Management
Specialist) and director of marketing at Viewpointe, delivered a presentation about applying advanced technologies such as
predictive coding to records management to locate content with value to businesses. As Doherty reports, use of content analytics extends beyond e-discovery,
just as the number of vendors offering analytics extends well beyond the floors of LegalTech New York.

September 24, 2012

Legal professionals seeking a predictive coding primer have two free competing guides to choose from, both with the same title,
"Predictive Coding for Dummies." The dueling "for Dummies" are being distributed by e-discovery vendors Symantec (Clearwell) and Recommind.

September 21, 2012

New products and upgrades in the e-discovery industry include a software to authenticate digital photographic evidence, improvements for legal holds, and an updated vendor directory from the folks who brought us the EDRM.

Fourandsix announced FourMatch, an extension for Adobe Photoshop CS5 and above that authenticates "signatures" on JPEGS from cameras and mobile devices. According to the company, when a JPEG is stored on hardware or software it results in a unique product signature. When an image is edited and saved on software, the file signature changes to match the software rather than the original device that captured it. Fourandsix can detect whether a JPEG's signature has changed — and whether the image has likely been altered.

September 20, 2012

The Legal Electronic Data Exchange Standards organization is following up last year's work on e-discovery billing codes with codes for e-discovery activity and expense, reports Evan Koblentz.

The codes are intended to provide greater insight into the e-discovery billing process by providing a uniform standard for law firms, corporate legal departments, vendors, and clients to itemize and evaluate e-discovery work. They align with the Electronic Discovery Reference Model and the EDRM Metrics Cube, the organization's model to represent how metrics codes fit into the e-discovery process. The new codes include the A100 series for activities and X300 for expenses; last year's billing codes are known as the L600 series.

Although industry experts welcome the effort to provide greater transparency into e-discovery costs, the LEDES codes have only seen modest adoption by e-discovery vendors.

September 19, 2012

Need to rack up some continuing legal education credits, especially those hard-to-find ethics hours? Concerned about the changes to the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct that now mandate that lawyers must be cognizant about legal technology? Want to learn more about how to effectively use trial technology?

Well, if you'll be in the San Francisco Bay Area today (Wednesday, September 19), have we got a program for you! Our sister publication, The Recorder, is sponsoring Legal Tech Day 2012 in San Francisco at the Commonwealth Club, located on the second floor of 595 Market Street. (BART/Muni: Montgomery Street station). Walk-ins are welcome!

September 14, 2012

Attorney Mark Michels, a frequent contributor to LTN as well as the EDD Update blog, has joined Deloitte Financial Advisory Services, as a director, specializing in e-discovery. Michels, former litigation manager and discovery counsel at Cisco Systems, will be based in San Jose, Calif, reports Monica Bay

"I am excited to join the Deloitte Discovery team because of the breadth and depth of its resources, focus on innovation, and commitment to clients," Michels told Law Technology News.

September 11, 2012

New York state courts are following in the e-discovery footsteps of federal court pilot programs such as the state's Southern District, according to a post by Paul E. Asfendis on Gibbons E-Discovery Law Alert, putting state court litigators on notice in at least one courtroom.

Under the aegis of New York's Electronic Discovery Working Group, Justice Jeffrey J. Oing's Part 48 of the State Supreme Court's Commercial Division in New York County will pilot the use of a new electronic discovery order (EDO) form. Participation in the program and completion of the order is mandatory for all cases filed in Part 48 after June 15, 2011.

September 07, 2012

AlixPartners has addedmore e-discovery heft to its information management services group with the addition of David White, former commercial litigation partner at Seyfarth Shaw, and Cynthia Bateman, director of evidence and discovery management and forensic technology services at KPMG.

According to Bateman, AlixPartners is showing tremendous growth helping companies develop repeatable processes for mitigating the risks associated with the identification, preservation, and collection for potentially relevant data for legal matters. She brings her own background to bear on this, having worked as a consultant at KPMG and in-house for Georgia-Pacific focused on the business processes of corporate legal and IT departments.